Misunderstandings and explicit/implicit communication

Francisco Yus

Quick links
A browser-friendly version of this article is not yet available. View PDF
Bach, K.
(1994a) Conversational impliciture. Mind and Language 9: 124–162. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1994b) Semantic slack. What is said and more. In S.L. Tsohatzidis (ed.), Foundations of speech act theory. Philosophical and linguistic perspectives. London: Routledge, pp. 267–291.Google Scholar
(1998) Standardization revisited. In A. Kasher (ed.), Pragmatics. Critical concepts, vol. 4. London: Routledge, pp. 712–720.Google Scholar
Bach, K. & R. Harnish
(1979) Linguistic communication and speech acts. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press (chapter 9: Indirect acts and illocutionary standardization, in A. Kasher (ed.), Pragmatics. Critical concepts, vol. 4. London: Routledge, pp. 682–712).  BoPGoogle Scholar
Barthes, R.
(1977) Image-music-text. London: Fontana.Google Scholar
Bazzanella, C. & R. Damiano
(1999a) Coherence and misunderstanding in everyday conversations. In Bublitz and Lenk (eds.), Coherence in discourse. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Conpany, pp. 175–187. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1999b) The interactional handling of misunderstanding in everyday conversations. Journal of Pragmatics 31: 817–836. Crossref  BoPGoogle Scholar
Bertolet, R.
(1994) Are there indirect speech acts? In S.L. Tsohatzidis (ed.), Foundations of speech act theory. Philosophical and linguistic perspectives. London: Routledge, pp. 335–349.Google Scholar
Bertuccelli Papi, M.
(1999) Implicitness to whom? In J. Verschueren (ed.), Pragmatics in 1998. Selected papers from the 6th International Pragmatics Conference. Antwerp: IPrA.Google Scholar
Blakemore, D.
(1989) Linguistic form and pragmatic interpretation: The explicit and the implicit. In L. Hickey (ed.), The pragmatics of style. London: Routledge, pp. 29–51.Google Scholar
(1992) Understanding utterances. Oxford: Blackwell.  BoPGoogle Scholar
Blass, R.
(1990) Relevance relations in discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Crossref  BoPGoogle Scholar
Brooks, L.
(1999) Do you want to come back to my place? The Guardian 13 December 1999, Women.
Cameron, R. & J. Williams
(1997) Senténce to ten cents: A case study of relevance and communicative success in nonnative-native speaker interactions in a medical setting. Applied Linguistics 18.4: 415–445. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Carston, R.
(1988) Implicature, explicature, and truth-theoretic semantics. In R.M. Kempson (ed.), Mental representations. The interface between language and reality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 155–181.Google Scholar
(1996) Enrichment and loosening: Complementary processes in deriving the proposition expressed. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 8: 61–88.Google Scholar
(1998a) The semantics/pragmatics distinction: A view from relevance theory. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 10: 53–80.Google Scholar
(1998b) Postcript. In A. Kasher (ed.), Pragmatics. Critical Concepts, vol. 4. London: Routledge, pp. 464–477.Google Scholar
(1999) The semantics/pragmatics distinction: A view from relevance theory. In K. Turner (ed.), The semantics/pragmatics interface from different points of view. Oxford: Elsevier Science, pp. 85–125.Google Scholar
Clark, H.H.
(1979) Responding to indirect speech acts. Cognitive Psychology 11: 430–477. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1996) Using language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dascal, M.
(1999) Introduction: Some questions about misunderstanding. Journal of Pragmatics 31: 753–762. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dascal, M. & I. Berenstein
(1987) Two modes of understanding: comprehending and grasping. Language & Communication 7: 139–151. Crossref  BoPGoogle Scholar
Dascal, M. & O. Gruengard
(1981) Unintentional action and non-action. Manuscrito IV-2: 103–113.Google Scholar
Díez Arroyo, M.L.
(1997) Figurative vs literal meaning in idioms. A comparative study English-Spanish. Atlantis XIX(2): 51–64.Google Scholar
Franken, N.
(1997) Vagueness and approximation in relevance theory. Journal of Pragmatics 28: 135–151. Crossref  BoPGoogle Scholar
Gibbs, R.W.
(1979) Contextual effects in understanding indirect requests. Discourse Processes 2: 1–10. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1984) Literal meaning and psychological theory. Cognitive Science 8: 275–304. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1994) The poetics of mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
(1998) The varieties of intentions in interpersonal communication. In S.R. Fussell & R.J. Kreuz (eds.), Social and cognitive approaches to interpersonal communication. Mahwah (NJ): LEA, pp. 19–37.Google Scholar
(1999) Speaker=s intuitions and pragmatic theory. Cognition 69: 355–359. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gibbs, R.W. & J.F. Moise
(1997) Pragmatics in understanding what is said. Cognition 62: 51–74. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Goodman, B.A.
(1986) Reference identification and reference identification failures. Computational Linguistics 12.4.: 273–305.Google Scholar
Grimshaw, A.
(1980) Mishearings, misunderstandings and other nonsuccesses in talk: A plea for redress of speaker-oriented bias. Sociological Inquiry 40: 31–74. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Groefsema, M.
(1992) >Can you pass the salt?=: A short-circuited implicature? Lingua 87: 103–135. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Grossen, M.
(1996) Counselling and gatekeeping: Definitions of the problem and situation in a first therapeutic interview. Text 16: 161–198. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Grossen, M. & D. Apothéloz
(1996) Communicating about communication in a therapeutic interview. Journal of Language and Social Psychology 15: 101–132. Crossref  BoPGoogle Scholar
Herman, V.
(1997) Misunderstanding and power: Contests of understandings. In M. Maufort & J.-P. van Noppen (eds.), Voices of power. Brussels: Belgian Association of Anglicists in Higher Education, pp. 33-43.Google Scholar
Holtgraves, T.
(1998) Interpersonal foundations of conversational indirectness. In S.R. Fussell & R.J. Kreuz (eds.), Social and cognitive approaches to interpersonal communication. Mahwah, NJ.: LEA, pp. 71–89.Google Scholar
Humphreys-Jones, C.
(1986) Make, make do and mend: The role of the hearer in misunderstandings. In G. McGregor (ed.), Language for hearers. Oxford: Pergamon, pp. 105–126.Google Scholar
Jaszczolt, K.M.
(1998) Referring in discourse: referential intention and the >taking for granted= principle. Journal of Literary Semantics XXVII/2: 96–109.Google Scholar
(1999) Default semantics, pragmatics, and intentions. In K. Turner (ed.), The semantics/pragmatics interface from different points of view. Oxford: Elsevier Science, pp. 199–232.Google Scholar
Linell, P.
(1995) Troubles with mutualities: Towards a dialogical theory of misunderstanding and miscommunication. In I. Marková, C. Graumann & K. Foppa (eds.), Mutualities in dialogue. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 176–213.Google Scholar
Maynard, D.W.
(1991) On the interactional and institutional bases of asymmetry in clinical discourse. American Journal of Sociology 97: 448–495. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Nicolle, S & B. Clark
(1999) Experimental pragmatics and what is said: A response to Gibbs and Moise. Cognition 69: 337–354. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Récanati, F.
(1989) The pragmatics of what is said. Mind and Language 4: 295–329. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1993) Direct reference. From language to thought. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
(1995) The alleged priority of literal interpretation. Cognitive Science 19: 207–232. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Salazar Orvig, A.
(1995) Misunderstandings and the construction of dialogue in a clinical interview. International Journal of Applied Psycholinguistics 11: 227–247.Google Scholar
Schegloff, E.A.
(1987) Some sources of misunderstanding in talk-in-interaction. Linguistics 25: 201–218. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1992) Repair after next turn: The last structurally provided defense of intersubjectivity in conversation. American Journal of Sociology 97: 1295–1345. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Searle, J.R.
(1978) Literal meaning. Erkenntnis 13: 207–224. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Sperber, D. & D. Wilson
(1990) Spontaneous deduction and mutual knowledge. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 13: 179–184. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1986a) Relevance: Communication and cognition. Oxford: Blackwell.  BoPGoogle Scholar
Sperber, D. and D. Wilson
(1986b) Loose talk. In S. Davis (ed.), Pragmatics: A reader. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 540–549.Google Scholar
Sperber, D. & D. Wilson
(1987) Précis of Relevance: Communication and Cognition . Behavioral and Brain Sciences 10: 697–754. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1995) Relevance: Communication and cognition (2nd edition). Oxford: Blackwell.  MetBibGoogle Scholar
(1997) The mapping between the mental and the public lexicon. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 9: 107–125.Google Scholar
Toolan, M.
(1991) Perspectives on literal meaning. Language & Communication 11.4: 333–351. Crossref  BoPGoogle Scholar
Vicente, B.
(1996) Non-literal speech and indirection. Paper presented at the Ipra Conference. Mexico City.
(1998) Against blurring the explicit/implicit distinction. Revista Alicantina de Estudios Ingleses 11 (special volume devoted to relevance theory): 241–258. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Weigand, E.
(1999) Misunderstanding: The standard case. Journal of Pragmatics 31: 763–785. Crossref  BoPGoogle Scholar
Weizman, E. & S. Blum-Kulka
(1992) Ordinary misunderstanding. In M. Stamenow (ed.), Current advances in semantic theory. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company, pp. 417–432. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Weizman, E.
(1999) Building true understanding via apparent miscommunication: A case study. Journal of Pragmatics 31: 837–846. Crossref  BoPGoogle Scholar
West, C.
(1985) Routine complications: Troubles with talk between doctors and patients. Bloomington: University of Indiana Press.  BoPGoogle Scholar
Wilson, D.
(1994) Relevance and understanding. In: G. Brown, K. Malmkjaer, A. Pollitt & J. Williams (eds.), Language and understanding. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 35–58.Google Scholar
Yamaguchi, H.
(1988) How to pull strings with words. Deceptive violations in the garden-path joke. Journal of Pragmatics 12: 323–337. Crossref  BoPGoogle Scholar
Yus, F.
(1997a) Cooperación y relevancia. Dos aproximaciones pragmáticas a la interpretación. Alicante: Servicio de Publicaciones.Google Scholar
(1997b) Indirectness in conversation: The theory of sub-continua. Paper presented at the XXI International AEDEAN Conference. Seville (Spain), December 1997.
(1997c) Pragmática del malentendido. Paper presented at the XV International AESLA Conference. Zaragoza (Spain), 14–16 April 1997.
(1997d) La teoría de la relevancia y la estrategia humorística de la incongruencia-resolución. Pragmalingüística 3–4: 497–508.
(1997e) La interpretación y la imagen de masas. Alicante: Instituto de Cultura AJuan Gil-Albert@.Google Scholar
(1998a) A decade of relevance theory. Journal of Pragmatics 30: 305–345. Crossref  BoPGoogle Scholar
(1998b) Relevance: A thematic bibliographical list. Revista Alicantina de Estudios Ingleses 11 (special volume devoted to relevance theory): 261–285.
(1998c) The what-do-you-mean syndrome. A taxonomy of misunderstandings in Harold Pinter=s plays. Estudios Ingleses de la Universidad Complutense 6: 81–100.Google Scholar
(1998d) Relevance theory and media discourse: A verbal-visual model of communication. Poetics 25: 293–309. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1998e) Irony: Context accessibility and processing effort. Pragmalingüística 5–6: 391–411.
(1999) Towards a pragmatic taxonomy of misunderstandings. Revista Canaria de Estudios Ingleses 38: 217–239.Google Scholar